Skip to main content

Which category of plastic, photodegradable or biodegradable, is better for the environment?

Photodegradable and biodegradable plastics are each better for the environment than non-degradable plastics.  However, only biodegradable plastic is able to be returned to the natural carbon cycle in a reasonable amount of time, thereby rendering it superior to photodegradable plastic.


Photodegradable plastics are those which have chemicals added that make them brittle under certain conditions, usually exposure to sunlight.  Although the plastic appears to be breaking down into smaller more manageable pieces, they are still pieces of plastic and not usable by organic organisms.  Technically, the pieces may eventually be broken down into small enough particles for use, but the timeframe isn't established and cannot be considered reasonable yet, although science is still working on improving the products.


Biodegradable plastics break down and can be ingested by organisms in the metabolic cycle.  This returns the carbon in the plastic to the carbon cycle in nature.  The ability to be re-used via natural cycle makes biodegradable plastics better for the environment, though still not as good compostable plastics, which are biodegradable plastics with a very specific degradation period.  The timeframe it takes biodegradable plastics to break down depends on the type and how close to optimal the conditions the plastic experiences are.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more